About your Search

20120926
20121004
STATION
CSPAN 40
LANGUAGE
English 40
Search Results 0 to 39 of about 40 (some duplicates have been removed)
journal" is next. ♪ host: this wednesday morning we would love to hear your take on foreign policy. specifically on what the governor -- former governor massachusetts, mitt romney, and president barack obama had said yesterday. specifically yesterday said -- specifically we want your general level confidence in each candidate on the area of foreign policy. here are the numbers to call. for democrats, 202-737-0001. for republicans, 202-737-0002. for independents, 202-628-0205. if you would like to take part in the program, there are different ways to do that. twitter.com/c-spanwj,an.o facebook.com or e-mail at journal@c-span.org. "the baltimore sun" encapsulate the speeches yesterday. they pointed out that president barack obama made an impassioned defense of the expression of freedom worldwide. mitt romney urged other nations to emulate the free economy and suggested that the obama leadership in the middle east has been inadequate and reactive. this is a short piece to start us off from the president at united nations yesterday, talking about the middle east. [video clip] >> i beli
prime minister did iran and u.s. foreign policy part of the conversation on this morning's "washington journal." host: he is teaching as a professor of diplomacy and international politics at harvard. thank you for joining us. you heard the speeches from new york and all the play and the dueling foreign policy points. what is your take away as far as each candidate had to say in new york? guest: first, it is every interesting that foreign policy and national-security issues have made a real comeback. they are part of this campaign, a big part of the discussion. i think that is a good thing because of foreign policy is so important to every single american because we live in a globalized world. president obama gave a very thoughtful, reflective speech yesterday. he covered a lot of ground ready focused on the middle east and the very tragic events that took place two weeks ago this week, the assassination of ambassador chris stevens in libya and three of his diplomatic colleagues. he also made two important points, that americans obviously want to show great religious tolerance for the
on foreign policy, and my opponents have a different view -- even on foreign policy my opponents have a different view. he says it was tragic how i when did it -- how i ended the war in iraq. i am going to use the money to pay down our debt and to put more people back to work, rebuilding roads and bridges and schools and runways, because after a decade of war, it is time to do nation-building right here at home. [applause] that is a choice we now face. that is what this election comes down to. the other side, they like to tell you, and they are going to spend a lot of money to get these checks for people who can afford to write a $10 million checks, and they are going to tell you is bigger tax cuts and regulations is the only way to go. now they are going to tell you since government cannot do everything it should do almost nothing. their theory is if you cannot afford health care, we hope you do not get sick. there are some companies polluting the air, but that is the price of progress. maybe you cannot afford to go to college. your parents will play a. that is not who we are. now th
. to deal with china, it is the fundamental problem of american foreign policy right now. the difficulty is chinese history is totally different. we have been secure through most of our history from other countries, the impact of foreign societies on us. the chinese state has always been surrounded by a multiplicity of states. the management of all barriers has been a principal necessity of chinese foreign policy. we have done it on a pragmatic basis. the chinese have learned to take a longer, strategic view because one cannot decide the outcome of any issue unless you look at it in a longer-term. but these societies have two different approaches. it is an ever evolving situation. china is now rising country. we have the status quo countries similar to germany and england and therefore the likelihood is something like that might occur again. remember, china is a country that is returning to what it believes it has always been, namely the center of asian affairs. but it is inevitable that the rise in china will impinge on the united states. there are a number of things we need to keep in
. >> it is important to have a foreign policy to start with. you have to have some basic principles, the guidelines. that needs to an acute -- includingraq, afghanist, a whole lot of other countries as well. the problem is we have not had that. what it seems like the vacillating policies we have almost punished our friends and helped o enemies. we decided to turn our backs on two of our allies, the czech republic and poland. we had plans to build missile defense. we gave that is a concession to russia. how much has russia helped us with iran? how much has russia helped us with the situation in afghanistan? giving special attention to chavez and turning our back on netanyahu when he wanted to meet with the president, the sending of mixed signals is very destructive to foreign policy. in the case of egypt, for instance, we talked a little bit about that in a press release. this is a country that should be protectg our embassy. while we give the money? let's withholdny money for egypt until they start acting like a nation, protect our embassy, and start not fundamentally consulting us by built -- by b
under control. your statement is not accurate. >> let me go back to the policy questions, foreign policy question about the situation recently with the north africa. american taxpayers billions of dollars -- it was a big issue when we saw the scenes will see in a moment in egypt and the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. a radical islamist group attacked the u.s. embassy and tore down the american flag. in the same day, in libya, an assault on the consulate resulted in the death of the american ambassador christopher stevens and three others. these images echo the worst -- the recall those moments in 1979 with the taking of american hostages at the embassy in iran. u.s. taxpayers as an enormous 1.6 billion doris to egypt, -- $1.6 billion to egypt, which is now run by a former member of the muslim brotherhood. should the u.s. give up foreign aid to these nations, mr. sadler? >> no. not now, we have a fledgling government being formed a. with egypt withholding funds, the editorial board agreed is time for us to stop the old on that aid. it is in our best interests to stay involved.
. there are very few differences between my opponent and me on foreign policy. if she wants to have a debate, she ought to have that debate with the president. there is no furnace and the middle east today -- firmness in the middle east today. what happened in egypt and libya, it took them weeks to decide it was a terrorist attack. i am concerned because israel needs our help. it will need our support and i stand behind them. >> ok. >> this is an issue that is very important to me. i have spent a critical time in middle east peace. -- considerable time in middle east peace. when i disagreed with the president, i was the first one on either side of the aisle to express my differences in no uncertain terms. let me turn this around and talk to you about things you do not hear. this administration, with my help, plused up the israeli budget by $200 million this year. we helped to create and put up israel's defense system. when israel was faced with the palestinians going to the united nations and asking for a unilateral declaration, there was one country that stood with israel and stopped that. that
. prior to that, he led the publican -- republican feature. he also has served as foreign policy adviser to senator john mccain. all of you see him regularly on fox news sunday and the fox news channel. i met him in 1981 when he was a very young assistant professor at the university of pennsylvania. the question that i would like to pose for each of you, and i will start with governor what does this through feel about the leadership styles of mitt romney and president obama? >> probably not much. >> ok, will this panel is over. [laughter] >> you could extrapolate a few things from president obama's first term that may be instructive. he is not the manager. he does out of a history of managing things. you bring in a lot of good, well trained people and give them tasks and try to lead a government. in the case of mitt romney, who has been a governor, a business guy. he has run the olympics. i think his attitude would be efficiency. i will come in and look at running governments, like a business, which is not always the right answer because government is not a business. you should always lo
, or he is expected to make a foreign policy speech on monday. >> this is certainly -- this is the first social media debate. i am wondering about -- how your yahoo will be involved, live streaming, lots of ways to comment. ways people can comment as it is happening, share clips, create mash-ups of what is going on tonight. how are the campaign's harnessing this, or is it too early, and they will have to see how it plays out? >> both campaigns to put a lot of effort into social media this time. obvious lot -- the obama campaign has a lot of history in 2008. so much of their effort to turn out voters was on-line, but the romney campaign is doing a lot tonight as well. they have their entire response team on twitter responding to what happens in the debate. not just reporters, but average people can follow along as well. i think they are both really trying to organize, get people excited about the debates and the campaigns. romney announced earlier today that the campaign is going to have almost 400 debate-what parties, a lot of them organized online. they're trying to focus on mind and tu
have a demonstration that has not been clear on foreign policy, and there has been a lack of leadership. in 2009, there were protesters in iran. we heard nothing from our government. in 2011, the government finally stepped forward and we saw some sanctions put in place. i am happy to see european countries have also stepped forward and into a limited sanctions against iran. but we need to have a strong administration who is going to make it clear that a line needs to be drawn. we have never heard from this government. we have never heard them say that iran should not be in reaching uranium. -- enriching uranium. we need to make clear if we are going to be leaders, if the united states of america is going to be a leader in foreign policy and keep stability in this world as has been our mission in the past, then we need to make it clear. >> sen. fischer, thank you. senator kerrey, 30 seconds. >> i'm not running for president so i do not want to disagree with president obama or governor romney on iran, but we cannot allow them to acquire nuclear weapons. but what happens afterwards? they d
on foreign policy. the war in afghanistan is drawing to a close. the plans have been laid out for troops to return home. what is an acceptable outcome to the war in afghanistan, and what is our responsibility to achieve that outcome after u.s. troops returned? >> we have always had difficult returned with describing that, and as a result we need to get our troops out of afghanistan as quickly as we can. >> before the president's timeline? >> it is time to bring our troops home and stop spending $2 billion a week in afghanistan. we need that money. >> the united states does not have responsibility any longer? >> we cannot rebuild afghanistan for ever. we cannot do that. having unrealistic goals and spending more money is the wrong approach. i want to say on this, all three of my brothers served in the military. our service members are incredible. they will do anything we ask of them. they work hard, they are resourceful, but that means we owe them an obligation to put them out in harm's way when we have clear goals in mind, when it is clear what we're going to do, how we will accomplish i
tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern. the last debate will have a theme of foreign policy. the carnegie endowment for international peace recently hosted a panel on the president's role in leading foreign policy talking about american influence, the changing international order, and more. among the panelists is a thomas friedman. this is about an hour and half. >> good evening. my name is david rothkopf and i will be the moderator for this carnegie endowment discussion about how the next american president should engage the world. this is a debate format it discussion. we have a terrific group here. on my right, we have john ikenberry from princeton. next to him as thomas friedman from "the new york times." then just a matter is from the carnegie endowment. then robert keeton from the brookings institute. -- jessica matthews and then robert kagan. i will open up with a quotation from one or two of the panelists and we will then have some interaction on the theme of the ". lanham alaskan questions about related issues. at the end of each one of these 20 or 25 minute sections i will look to you for
. and about 45 minutes, we will look of the issue of foreign policy in this year's campaign. policy in this year's campaign. our guest
important foreign- policy debate between nixon and kennedy were islands off the main island of china. those of us on the panel, we thought there were possibly an oriental dance team. [laughter] >> you heard it here. >> let's take a look at another clip from 1988. >> governor, it kiddy were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penay for the killer? peacoat know, i do not. i think you know i oppose the death penalty during all of my life. i do not see any evidence it is a deterrent. i think there are better and more effective ways to deal with violent crime. we have done so in my own state, and one of the reasons why we have had the biggest drop in crime of any industrial state in america and the lowest murder rates. we have work to do in this nation. we of work to do to fight a real war that the phony war. -- we have work to do to buy the real war thanot a phony war. we have much to do to step up the war. >> some say that these debates are not really debates, but joint press conferences. the answer was seen somewhat determining the outcome of the election, but what they u
of decisions, whether it's milosevic or whatever, in the military and foreign policy area? >> well, they should look at our proposals and look at us as people and make up their own minds. when i was a young man, i volunteered for the army. i served my country in vietnam. my father was a senator who strongly opposed the vietnam war. i went to college in this great city, and most of my peers felt against the war as i did. but i went anyway because i knew if i didn't, somebody else in the small town of carthage, tennessee, would have to go in my place. i served for eight years in the house of representatives and i served on the intelligence committee, specialized in looking at arms control. i served for eight years in the united states senate and served on the armed services committee. for the last eight years i've served on the national security council, and when the conflict came up in bosnia, i saw a genocide in the heart of europe with the most violent war on the continent of europe since world war ii. look, that's where world war i started in the balkans. my uncle was a victim of poisonous ga
an american foreign policy that leads toward a safer world. the american people see this debt, and they know it's got to come down. and if it won't come down, the economy's going to slow down, maybe go into a recession. they see this tremendous influx and swamping of cheap foreign imports in this country that has cost over 3 million jobs, given farmers the worst year in american history. and they know this debt must come down as well, because it's unfair to our children. the american people want this environment protected. they know that these toxic waste dumps should have been cleaned up a long time ago, and they know that people's lives and health are being risked, because we've had an administration that has been totally insensitive to the law and the demand for the protection of the environment. the american people want their children educated. they want to get our edge back in science, and they want a policy headed by the president that helps close this gap that's widening between the united states and europe and japan. the american people want to keep opening doors. they want those civ
-- the foreign policy, there was a spike when mitt romney went abroad. i believe aj invited us here and our job is to keep everyone here on the panel on this. >> think you're a very interesting. as our panelists make their presentation, maybe it least two items i thought would be interested to adjust -- the very interesting article and book out now by sasha eisenberg about the fact that the press cannot keep up with political consultants and social that parking experts. reporters basically are way behind the curve in this campaign. we think that is an interesting topic to take a look at. as well as the fact that in a wave of reporters, my impression is it looks like both candidates have succeeded for the most part in talking over the press, especially the traveling press, and making them almost irrelevant to the campaign. let us start off with amy davidson. >> can everybody hear me? i will start by addressing what he does talk about a little bit. even in the title of the panel, is this any way to cover a campaign? there is somewhat of a note of this may which i think -- dismay, which i think a
impact and influence on the big decisions, especially those made a lead the major domestic and foreign policies. in the united states and in europe, their voices are not heard, even if -- human and ethical values are satisfied -- sacrificed for growth, and the willingness to listen to the demands of the people has become only at the time of elections. the current world order is discriminatory and based on injustice. distinguished friends, what should be done, and what is the way out of the current situation? there is no doubt that the world is in need of a new order and a fresh way of thinking, in which man is recognized as got's supreme creation, enjoying material and some -- spiritual quality. the divine nature film with a desire to seek justice and truth. -- filled with a desire to seek justice and truth. human dignity and universal happiness and perfection. an order which is afterpiece, -- after peace, less insecurity, and for all walks of life around the globe. an order founded on trust and kindness and putting forth hearts and hands closer to each other. rulers must love people.
is foreign policy. and i said, what is your role if one of the other says something that is not true? >> he he said if it is outrageo, i will step and. but it is designed to let each of the candidates say that is not the case. at the very least, it will make for a pretty good tv watching. and one of the hopes is that they do not go too far in misrepresenting their opponent's record. >> this has been a year for the fact checkers. if the candidate did not say so many factually incorrect things -- what i was going to say, i was reminded by catherine's mention of the ford incident. the fact is that the overnight polls did not show that the public was aware that he had made this horrendous misstatement. it was only after a week of the press incessantly talking about the incident that the polls turn around and people decided that he had lost the debate. what i like to do, we have the debate watch at penn state on campus. we bring 200 or 300 students in to watch the debate. so they can make up their own minds about the debate and not listen to the spin doctors to form their opinion. >> what i reme
the moderator from cbs. >> the most important foreign- policy debate between nixon and kennedy were islands off the main island of china. those of us on the panel, we thought there were possibly an oriental dance team. [laughter] >> you heard it here. >> let's take a look at another clip from 1988. >> governor, it kiddy were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer? peacoat know, i do not. i think you know i oppose the death penalty during all of my life. i do not see any evidence it is a deterrent. i think there are better and more effective ways to deal with violent crime. we have done so in my own state, and one of the reasons why we have had the biggest drop in crime of any industrial state in america and the lowest murder rates. we have work to do in this nation. we of work to do to fight a real war that the phony war. -- we have work to do to buy the real war not a phony war. we have much to do to step up the war. >> some say that these debates are not really debates, but joint press conferences. the answer was seen somewhat determining the outcome o
a cartoon. mitt romney -- the u.s. should immediately bomb england. foreign policy with mitt romney. this is a cartoon that i had in my comic strip. we each have these -- i do not know. i am not sure if best and -- i promised i would not miss up your comic strip. we each do a comic strip so we are lucky as far as editorial cartoons. good to use the other side of our brands to read comics. i have been accused of making my way to political. this is my 9/11 tribute. it actually was originally a long strip. you have to turn your head to see it. i made it into an editorial cartoon. here is mitt romney having a candlelight vigil for osama bin laden. this is a cartoon i did the year after 9/11 about maybe some of the causes behind 9/11. this is also the year after 911. i call it the twin tepees. it marks the genocide that has happened. it was a reaction to some of the more excess of chest beating about 9/11. we never remember the other tragedies that have been on american soil. i do not really have anything to say about this. [laughter] i think the ladies and know what i am talking about.
questions. people need answers. this foreign-policy mass, -- mess, he always watns transparency. host: you're in a swing state. are you seeing a lot of commercials? caller: i go back and forth between denver and the suburbs. when they go out and do the polls, they're finding out that they're asking more democrats and coming back with a 10 point lead. from what i've seen, they're trying to go back to the 2008 turn out. host: that was got from colorado springs. up next in oregon on the democratic line. caller: it's nice to talk to you today. thank you for taking my call. the media tries to interject their opinions into the politics of what's going on today. i do not care whether that is republican or democrat. i think the media has this about their ability to be neutral. one of the examples that i would give is to checked politifact. whenever they give up facts about the president and romney -- did he really do that stuff? then instead of coming back, if obama is not 100% on a point, they will find some way or some small percentage to show that he was not exactly a perfectly right therefore
believe this is an area where we have to stand united as americans on this foreign policy. i have voted for tough and biting sanctions against iran and believe that that process needs to continue to play itself out. all options on the table, but i also would never frivolously, not quite the right word. i would never without thoughtful plans send our men and women into harm's way without an exit strategy and an assurance we are going to be effective. >> our next question is from robert kennedy, directed first to representative baldwin. >> representative, the situation in afghanistan, american troops being killed by the people that they're training to provide security forer that country, some of those training missions now have been put on hold at least temporarily. how in your opinion, should americans continue to be at risk in that environment? is it too unstable of an environment for effective security exercise to continue? your thoughts on that. >> i appreciate that question. in 2001, i voted to authorize use of mill tear force in afghanistan. in the days and months following the nen
back to work and stop giving money overseas to the middle east. it helps our foreign policy, it helps our economy, it helps our pay checks. [applause] another area, as i mentioned, you have all these people in between jobs. for every people that got a job last month, which is a good thing, nearly four people have stopped looking for a job. we are slipping behind. and what we see when we look at the faces, when we talk to the people, when we see the names, it is a person in their 30's, 40's, 50's, early 60's -- i'll get to the people in their 20's in a minute. it is a person that came out of school, got a career, got a good job, and then the factory left. then their job went away. now they don't have anything to replace it with. we need to help people who in the middle of their careers get the skills they need to get the job they want that gives them a career for the 21st century that gives them real economic security. that gives them a better job with better take-home pay so they can provide for their families. we need to clean up our education system. we need to make sure that we don
. that needs to be made clear. we have an administration that has a foreign policy that is in confusion. it is not clear to our allies nor to our foes. with regards to iran, we saw student protestors. no word from this administration. no word at all. finally in 2011 the united states stepped forward with sanctions. i'm happy that the european nations have stepped forward with sanctions as well. but we need to be clear with our allies, with our ally israel. this isn't just their problem or that reggie. this is a problem for the world. it is estimated in three years the iranians are going to have icbm's that can reach the united states. this is our concern. and we have heard nothing from this administration with regard to iran enriching uranium. there is a lack of leadership, a lack of claret. -- clarity. i want america to remain a stabilizing force in the world. a lack of leadership, a lack of clarification, when our allies need to know what we are doing, we have lost that. moredon't know who is confused, governor romney or president obama. it is a confusing time in the middle east. the
need a foreign policy based on human rights, not on the procurement of oil resources. we provide for a green a new deal that would directly create jobs. because it creates jobs in the green economy, it allows us to back off these wars for oil and save hundreds of billions of dollars on the bloated military. instead it puts that money into jobs, health care, and education -- the things we need at home to create national security. host: the biggest challenge is getting on the ballot in 50 states. tell us about some of the difficulties you and others have encountered while trying to run and getting on each state ballot? guest: yes, there has been -- i am just now seeing that. a little delay here. the system is designed to keep alternative voices out of the mix. studies show one out of every two voters is not going to vote. that is 90 million eligible voters who will not vote this election. that is twice as many as the number that will vote for barack obama and twice as many as the number that will vote for mitt romney. that means most people do not feel represented by either of thes
with something, and you get touched on some positions. how would you describe foreign policy? how should america face the world? >> we should be the shining begin on the hill. but our military interventions, are going in, and we are determining -- we are replacing one dictator with another dictator. foreign aid is money spent on dictators. it is not spent on people in other countries. it is spent on propping up other governments. we are funding the insurgents in syria, and one-quarter of the insurgents in syria are supposed to be al qaeda. did we not do this in afghanistan? did we not bankroll osama bin laden? what we ought to have learned is that these military interventions make enemies to the united states, people who are affected by this. these drones strikes, yes, we hit the targets, but we wipe out another quarter block. we kill tens of thousands of innocent civilians living in these countries that we are ostensibly there to help. we are just continuing to make more and more enemies. it is no surprise that the unrest in the middle east is occurring right now. i would get out of our embassi
an administration that has a foreign policy that is in confusion. it is not clear to our allies nor to our foes. with regards to iran, in 2009 we saw a student protestors. no word from this administration. no word at all. finally, in 2011, the united states stepped forward with sanctions. i am happy that the european nations have stepped forward with sanctions as well. but we need to be clear with our allies, with our ally israel. it is not just a problem of that region. this is a problem for the world. it is estimated that in three years, the iranians are going to have icbm's that could reach the united states. this is our concern, and we have heard nothing from this administration with regard to iran enriching uranium. there's a lot of leader -- lack of leadership, a lack of clarity. i want america to remain a stabilizing force in the world. we need to have that. but with the lack of leadership, lack of clarification, what our allies don't know what we're doing, when our foe shalits just, we've lost that. >> senator kerrey? >> i don't know who is more confused, governor romney or president ob
. that needs to be made clear. we have an administration that has foreign policy that is in confusion. it is not clear to our allies. in 2009 we saw student , and no word from this administration. in 2011 the united states stepped forward with a sanction. i am happy european nations have stepped forward with a sanction, but we need to be clear with our ally, israel, and this is not their problem. it is not just a problem in that region. this is a problem for the world. it is estimated in three years the iranians are going to be able to reach the united states. this is our concern, and we have heard nothing from the sun ministration -- from this administration with regards to iran enriching. there is a lack of clarity. i want america to remain a stabilizing force in in the world. we need to have thought, but with lack of leadership, lack of clarification, when our allies do not know what we are doing common we have lost that. >> thank you. senator kerry. >> this is a confusing time after the arab spring. it is hard to find out what is going on in the middle east. they do not call it th
will look at the issue of foreign policy on this year's presidential campaign. a political science professor at norfolk state university will focus on the role of virginia in the election. we will also be joined by the editor in chief of the washington monthly to discuss a recent article in the magazine examining the consumer financial protection juror -- protection bureau. >> september 11, 2001, was a day that changed my life forever. i will go through a presentation, able ally in the account of the historical account of the attack as things transpired that day. a lot of things happened very quickly. i will do my best not to ramble on and go too fast. i would ask you to sit back and clear your mind and put yourself in that room and you'll get a real sense of what it was like to be at the top of the food chain. >> more from a retired lieutenant colonel robert darling. this weekend on american history tv, sunday at 7:30 on c-span3. >> the former ambassador to pakistan says the u.s. needs a new approach in its relationship with that country. he spoke for the first time since returning from isl
of the country's top oil producers are also located there as well. the added states foreign policy, toward the persian gulf, has focused on ensuring the free flow of oil from the gulf to global markets. and opposing the nomination of that area. traditionally, the soviet union, but in recent decades, iraq under saddam hussein. this has embroiled us and two wars. and lead to a significant military, a commitment of military assets in the area. the question arises regionwide is the united states extended such efforts and so much of its assets? when we are a number three oil producer in the world. and we import less than 20% of our crude imports from the gulf. these are the issues we will explore today. is the global energy marketplace changing? is the persian off oil and gas still important? is it likely to be in the future? where the dynamics in the immediate -- -- the impact on the area's ability to produce? or to export? we have with us tonight three very distinguished panelists. on my right, presently an adjunct professor at the school of business at georgetown university. for the previous
callers came up with several points. one of them spoke to foreign policy. you have touched a little bit on that. how would you describe your own at form policy approach? guest: we should not -- we should involve ourselves diplomatically, but that is really it. we should be the shining beacon on the hill. but our military interventions where we are going in and we are determining another foreign dictator -- we are replacing one foreign dictator with another? our foreign aid has not been helping other countries, but propping up other governments. we are finding insurgents in syria? and a quarter of those are supposed to be al qaeda? did we do this in afghanistan? pinki -- and didn't we do this in afghanistan? didn't we ultimately bankroll osama bin laden? we are making enemies of the united states. the strohm strikes, yes, we hit the target, but we white out another quarter block. -- we wipe out another quarter block. we are killing civilians in this country in that were ostensibly there to help. we're continually making more and more enemies. if is no surprise that the unrest in the midd
branches right now? >> i noted in the survey of american public opinion on foreign policy which just came out recently, there were very strange attitudes of americans regarding the middle east. a large majority saw it as the region of the world's most likely to create stress to the national security of the united states. there is a general trend of wanting less involvement militarily, economically, and so forth with this region. along with what david said, public opinion and how voters and citizens feel about the involvement of their country in the middle east is another issue. >> i would like to enter with certain details. it is very tricky and a very important. they may have problems, but the european union will continue to exist without any doubt. that is my position and my belief. for that part of the world, we are talking about our neighborhood. and therefore, the stability there is for migration, many things related to that mediterranean sea. it will be our priority for ever. it is always in the attention of any prime minister of the european union. more intensely in the south, and
at on a case by case basis. that those two issues of the foreign policy of the united states, as well as were we believe the military needs to be hored up. --: the defense budget does that sound right? guest: that sounds about right. caller: hello? host: go ahead. guest: good morning. caller: i have a couple of comments. i was disturbed by this conversation. miss blakey a corporate head and she has to do her job. things like this -- narrow minded republicans. i think americans want something different. we want peace. i know that is her job. host: your question, sir? caller: what are they fighting for? they want to give the american people less things. it is not fair. we to build back america and create jobs here. the idea of having a psychological advantage is -- host: we will leave it there. guest: everything i've been talking about this morning goes to the issue of preserving peace and stability. in the world we live and, peace must be maintained through strength. that is something most people accept. there are a number of factors in our economy. defense and military spending has a major ef
issues of the foreign policy of the united states, as well as were we believe the military needs to be shored up. host: the defense budget -- does that sound right? guest: that sounds about right. caller: hello? host: go ahead. guest: good morning. caller: i have a couple of comments. i was disturbed by this conversation. miss blakey a corporate head and she has to do her job. things like this -- narrow minded republicans. i think americans want something different. we want peace. i know that is her job. host: your question, sir? caller: what are they fighting for? they want to give the american people less things. it is not fair. we to build back america and create jobs here. the idea of having a psychological advantage is -- host: we will leave it there. guest: everything i've been talking about this morning goes to the issue of preserving peace and stability. in the world we live and, peace must be maintained through strength. that is something most people accept. there are a number of factors in our economy. defense and military spending has a major effect on the jobs at hom
decisions, especially those made of the domestic and foreign policies. in the united states and in europe, their voices are heard. they constitute 99% of the society. the human add ethical value are sacrificed in order to win growth and the willingness to listen to the demands of the people has become only to the time of election. the current world order is discriminatory and based on injustice. distinguished friends and colleagues, what should be done and what is the way of the current situation? there is no doubt that the world is in need of a new order and a fresh way of thinking. and although which man is recognized as god's supreme creation, enjoying material and spiritual equalities and possessing divine nature filled with in the -- in order tor survive, human dignity and believe in the universal happiness and perfection. three, an order which is after peace, security, and welfare for all walks of life around the globe. four, all that is founded upon trust and kindness, closer to each other, they must love people. five, a just and fair order in which everybody is equal before law an
shoes running up and down the halls of congress that make policy now -- the lobbyists, the pac guys, the foreign lobbyists, and what- have-you, they'll be over there in the smithsonian, you know -- because we're going to get rid of them, and the congress will be listening to the people. and the american people are willing to have fair, shared sacrifice. they're not as stupid as washington thinks they are. the american people are bright, intelligent, caring, loving people who want a great country for their children and grandchildren. and they will make those sacrifices. so i welcome that challenge, and just watch -- because if the american people send me there, we'll get it done. now, everybody will faint in washington. they've never seen anything happen in that town. [laughter] this is a town where the white house says, congress did it; congress says, the white house did it. and i'm sitting there and saying, well, who else could be around, you know? then when they get off by themselves, they say nobody did it. [laughter] and yet the cash register's empty and it used to have our mone
Search Results 0 to 39 of about 40 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)